Knowing is one of Nicholas Cage's lesser films, that's true, but it's nearly as bad as the majority of the critics reviews. Knowing is a science fiction film starring Nicolas Cage and Rose Byrne. The plot surrounds children who are able to tell when the worlds most horrific disasters and atrocities happened. Figuring out how these kids know these things and what the numbers mean is really what the entire movie is about. The performances are pretty good from the two leads. Byrne and Cage both turn in believable performances. I think that the script was average, the writers did their job, it's nothing spectacular but it suffices. The idea of the movie was very interesting and it's executed well for the most part. There are some parts of the movie that do feel kind of lackluster but they pale in comparison to the ending and how interesting it turns out to be. Some people said they thought the ending was too weird and random but I think it was unexpected and cool. And I think the way in which it ended gave the film a meaning. Overall yes I would recommend Knowing, it's not one I'd go to automatically when recommending films to people but I would say it's a fairly interesting watch. 7/10.
529 Reviews
Alex Proyas's doomsday piece boasts a chock full of interesting concepts and sleek special effects to make up its fundamentally flawed climax
Screen_Blitz27 July 2017
This science-fiction thrill piece starring Nicolas Cage in the protagonist role is a film blooming with brainy concepts on science and religion, while hanging over apocalyptic themes that pay reminiscence of other end-of-the-world flicks like 'Left Behind'. After all, the key figure in the story is revolves around what appears be a biblical prophecy, although the spiritial theme only serves as a small undertone here rather than driving the storyline. Director Alex Proyas, the father of projects such as 'Dark City' and 'I, Robot', exhibits his grandeur of visual stimulating style that manages to triumph over its compelling, if somewhat flawed plot. Proyas is successful at making the thought-provoking ideas work, even if they are occasionally little rocky. The only major flaw is lies in the final act that borders on the line of preposterous. It is not a groundbreaking piece of work for the genre, but it is just enough to warrant for a sweet recommendation. This film opens up in 1959, at an elementary school where children are given the assignment to draw pictures of what society will like fifty years from that time. One girl, Lucinda Embrey (played by Lara Robinson), draws a long series of seemingly random numbers and places the paper in the school's time capsule. Flash forward to fifty years later, a nine-year old Caleb Koestler (played by Chandler Canterbury) and his class open up the time capsule, and Lucinda's paper is found in his hands. When he shows the paper to his widowed father John (played by Nicolas Cage), an astrophysics professor at Massachutes Institute of Technology, John believes the numbers are enigmatic codes to disasters occurring around the globe. Enlisting the help of Lucinda's daughter Diana (played by Rose Byrne) and granddaughter Abby (also played by Lara Robinson), John must encrypt the message of what seems to be a sign of a global catastrophic event.
Some may question whether Alex Proyas is trying to deliver a cautionary tale about an apocalyptic prophecy or is pinning viewers with complex ideas of science and religious theology. Both are more than likely doubtful, especially when the plot shows little respect for the laws of science to begin with. Nonetheless, it keeps things deeply eerie and grim in terms of storytelling and tone, almost bordering the line of a psychological horror thriller. Caleb and Abby are children who are haunted by mysterious entities, resembling the alien creatures from 'Dark City', who introduce them to terrifying visions of the world facing mass destruction, an eerie, yet shocking concept that is placed with sweet visual spark in one scene where the former looks out his window and sees the forest engulfed in flames. The main protagonist in the story however, is John Koestler who is infused with a performance by Nicolas Cage that can only be described as acceptable, but not bad. When Koestler learns of the terrifying secrets behind Lucinda's prophetic message, that is when the story kicks into gear, allowing Proyas to experiment with his engaging concepts. His attempts at breathing life into his ideas are mostly successful and set room for some visually electrifying sequences such as devastating plane crash that leaves several victims flailing in flames and a subway crash that racks up an enormous death toll. However, the third act, which is predictable and sets up with heavy emotional sigma, is a little absurd; especially if how unrealistic the characters behave to such an unnerving situation that is on the horizon. Shouldn't they be more terrified? On the bright side, the audience is blessed with a riveting score by Marco Beltrami to settle the tone.
Knowing is a compelling doomsday-themed piece with a chock of interesting ideas of science and religion put into play, and a surprisingly enthralling execution by Alex Proyas who brings his powerful visual grandeur to the game. It is a flawed picture with an execution may have a few scars, but not enough to make it a sore to sit through. Don't expect it to be anything revolutionary.
Some may question whether Alex Proyas is trying to deliver a cautionary tale about an apocalyptic prophecy or is pinning viewers with complex ideas of science and religious theology. Both are more than likely doubtful, especially when the plot shows little respect for the laws of science to begin with. Nonetheless, it keeps things deeply eerie and grim in terms of storytelling and tone, almost bordering the line of a psychological horror thriller. Caleb and Abby are children who are haunted by mysterious entities, resembling the alien creatures from 'Dark City', who introduce them to terrifying visions of the world facing mass destruction, an eerie, yet shocking concept that is placed with sweet visual spark in one scene where the former looks out his window and sees the forest engulfed in flames. The main protagonist in the story however, is John Koestler who is infused with a performance by Nicolas Cage that can only be described as acceptable, but not bad. When Koestler learns of the terrifying secrets behind Lucinda's prophetic message, that is when the story kicks into gear, allowing Proyas to experiment with his engaging concepts. His attempts at breathing life into his ideas are mostly successful and set room for some visually electrifying sequences such as devastating plane crash that leaves several victims flailing in flames and a subway crash that racks up an enormous death toll. However, the third act, which is predictable and sets up with heavy emotional sigma, is a little absurd; especially if how unrealistic the characters behave to such an unnerving situation that is on the horizon. Shouldn't they be more terrified? On the bright side, the audience is blessed with a riveting score by Marco Beltrami to settle the tone.
Knowing is a compelling doomsday-themed piece with a chock of interesting ideas of science and religion put into play, and a surprisingly enthralling execution by Alex Proyas who brings his powerful visual grandeur to the game. It is a flawed picture with an execution may have a few scars, but not enough to make it a sore to sit through. Don't expect it to be anything revolutionary.
Anti-Armageddon, as far as Michael Bay goes
revival0516 October 2009
I feel a strange shift of priorities within moviegoers today, when a movie like District 9 can use very familiar content and simply shake it around a little, and then be hailed as a masterwork of originality and become immensely popular - while a movie like Knowing will be heavily questioned and criticized beyond it's proportions despite, or perhaps due to, the fact that it actually takes an actual leap of originality. I wonder when the latest time it was I saw a Hollywood-movie end up where this one ends up. While not being perfect, Knowing still is a proper science-fiction film in the vein of 2001 - A Space Odyssey and Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Certainly not as good, for various reasons, but at least clearly part of the genre.
The storyline of Knowing is kind of a reversed bottle neck, by the end the multitude of the story is as big as it gets but to begin with, we are in a kind of X Files territory where we get a spooky prologue with a mystery note being dug under the ground (I won't go into the details, because it's really not important for me to go over them) and post credits we pick it up 50 years later when the note ends up in the hands of MIT professor John Koestler (Nicholas Cage) who is one of those I-lost-my-wife-so-I-lost-my-faith kind of guys, believing that the universe as we know it is all random and coincidental. Easily cracked, the numbers on the note, written by a little girl and buried for five decades, declare the dates and places of all future disasters to come, including death tolls. Cage sees 9/11 predicted from this little girls hands in 1959, as well as the Katrina and several disasters that haven't taken place yet. Without saying too much, he doesn't like what he sees at the end of the list of numbers.
I have heard the movie be called predictable. Looking back, I must admit there's a lot of places where I could have seen a lot of things coming. Many quite blatant clues are placed right in the very first couple of scenes and if you know your plot and character mechanics, you would spot some obligatory scenes to come. However, I didn't. It seems I was in on the ride. The plot of the movie, I think, expands in such a methodical way that as long as you get sucked in to begin with, you don't ask any more questions. The mystery is intriguing enough to have you focus on the next shot, not the overall story. I was fairly annoyed by the story device that was seemingly on the side of the plot, dealing with Cage's kid being stalked by a couple of evil, albino trench-coat-guys looking like a bunch German electro-goths. I found that they distracted the viewer from the more interesting, down-to-earth kind of story going on with Cage. But come the ending of the movie, nothing is really earthbound and they seem kind of forgivable in retrospect. Just like in Close Encounters, Knowing is a movie that starts out cryptic but ends out in big scale cathartic satisfaction and harmony, as if it all (*all*) makes sense in the end.
As for the flaws, I didn't mind the story or any of the plot holes (which mostly are arguable anyway). What did bother me probably more than anything else about the movie, though, was it's unfortunate big-time flirt with the melodrama. Take the score for instance, by Marco Beltrami, not really king of the subtle, and it's unfortunate for a movie which deals with this unusual hypothesis to have such operatic and stereotypical acting. And why, WHY, do Hollywood-movies nowadays feel the need to use those HORRIBLE matte paintings? They look like a 50's parody! As for plot, Knowing certainly bites off a lot more than it can chew. I quickly noted in the credits, with fear, that while the story credit went to one person there were like three or four guys behind the actual script. That usually means what we also get in Knowing. Messy conflicts within the narrative and sudden "moronic behavior as plot device" from characters. Also, not every mystery thread thrown up on the floor ends up with a sensible conclusion. But despite a lot ends up as fairly arbitrary anyway, I think a lot of the questions are meant to be left unanswered. Knowing picks up a lot of ancient SF-ideas, that probably would seem tired if this genre had been over-represented in any way, and at the end of the day, you didn't ask the monkey in 2001 how he figured out how to use that piece of bone, right? In all fairness, the movie is partly a thriller so it needs certain plot devices in order for the it to have a good spook value which, I might add, it surely delivers. This is the kind of movie that creeps you out just by having a character flip a bed on to it's side. I'm not sure if these abandoned mysteries is a giant flaw or just one of those things you can roll with, but I know that it makes sure it doesn't reach the top. Knowing is a movie made I'd say for 80% entertainment, and I could say I was 80% entertained. The remaining 20% is sci-fi fodder and that made me happy too. No masterpiece then, but a good ride that I certainly will recommend.
Also. I get the feeling that a lot of people who dismissed Knowing this summer were the same guys who were angry at the Bay bashers of Transformers 2. I wonder, why on Earth are the flaws of Transformers 2 forgivable, whereas the strengths of Knowing dismissible?
The storyline of Knowing is kind of a reversed bottle neck, by the end the multitude of the story is as big as it gets but to begin with, we are in a kind of X Files territory where we get a spooky prologue with a mystery note being dug under the ground (I won't go into the details, because it's really not important for me to go over them) and post credits we pick it up 50 years later when the note ends up in the hands of MIT professor John Koestler (Nicholas Cage) who is one of those I-lost-my-wife-so-I-lost-my-faith kind of guys, believing that the universe as we know it is all random and coincidental. Easily cracked, the numbers on the note, written by a little girl and buried for five decades, declare the dates and places of all future disasters to come, including death tolls. Cage sees 9/11 predicted from this little girls hands in 1959, as well as the Katrina and several disasters that haven't taken place yet. Without saying too much, he doesn't like what he sees at the end of the list of numbers.
I have heard the movie be called predictable. Looking back, I must admit there's a lot of places where I could have seen a lot of things coming. Many quite blatant clues are placed right in the very first couple of scenes and if you know your plot and character mechanics, you would spot some obligatory scenes to come. However, I didn't. It seems I was in on the ride. The plot of the movie, I think, expands in such a methodical way that as long as you get sucked in to begin with, you don't ask any more questions. The mystery is intriguing enough to have you focus on the next shot, not the overall story. I was fairly annoyed by the story device that was seemingly on the side of the plot, dealing with Cage's kid being stalked by a couple of evil, albino trench-coat-guys looking like a bunch German electro-goths. I found that they distracted the viewer from the more interesting, down-to-earth kind of story going on with Cage. But come the ending of the movie, nothing is really earthbound and they seem kind of forgivable in retrospect. Just like in Close Encounters, Knowing is a movie that starts out cryptic but ends out in big scale cathartic satisfaction and harmony, as if it all (*all*) makes sense in the end.
As for the flaws, I didn't mind the story or any of the plot holes (which mostly are arguable anyway). What did bother me probably more than anything else about the movie, though, was it's unfortunate big-time flirt with the melodrama. Take the score for instance, by Marco Beltrami, not really king of the subtle, and it's unfortunate for a movie which deals with this unusual hypothesis to have such operatic and stereotypical acting. And why, WHY, do Hollywood-movies nowadays feel the need to use those HORRIBLE matte paintings? They look like a 50's parody! As for plot, Knowing certainly bites off a lot more than it can chew. I quickly noted in the credits, with fear, that while the story credit went to one person there were like three or four guys behind the actual script. That usually means what we also get in Knowing. Messy conflicts within the narrative and sudden "moronic behavior as plot device" from characters. Also, not every mystery thread thrown up on the floor ends up with a sensible conclusion. But despite a lot ends up as fairly arbitrary anyway, I think a lot of the questions are meant to be left unanswered. Knowing picks up a lot of ancient SF-ideas, that probably would seem tired if this genre had been over-represented in any way, and at the end of the day, you didn't ask the monkey in 2001 how he figured out how to use that piece of bone, right? In all fairness, the movie is partly a thriller so it needs certain plot devices in order for the it to have a good spook value which, I might add, it surely delivers. This is the kind of movie that creeps you out just by having a character flip a bed on to it's side. I'm not sure if these abandoned mysteries is a giant flaw or just one of those things you can roll with, but I know that it makes sure it doesn't reach the top. Knowing is a movie made I'd say for 80% entertainment, and I could say I was 80% entertained. The remaining 20% is sci-fi fodder and that made me happy too. No masterpiece then, but a good ride that I certainly will recommend.
Also. I get the feeling that a lot of people who dismissed Knowing this summer were the same guys who were angry at the Bay bashers of Transformers 2. I wonder, why on Earth are the flaws of Transformers 2 forgivable, whereas the strengths of Knowing dismissible?
The Good, The Bad and the Ugly
pugmahorn26 March 2009
The good: Strong start to the movie, the plot hooks you in, excellent sound, confronting disaster scenes, haunting images, Rose Byrne, at times quite freaky, The Bad: Special effects looked like they were from a video game, ripped off basically every science fiction movie ever made, poor acting from Nic Cage, very predictable.
The Ugly: Last third of movie was shamefully ridiculous.
Summary: If you are a science fiction fan, you will probably not be able to resist seeing this movie. Be warned, you will think you are seeing the sci-fi great that you have been waiting for but mid way the film gets lost. You may very well groan out loud at the ending. This had the makings of a great movie but unfortunately it couldn't come up with the goods.
The Ugly: Last third of movie was shamefully ridiculous.
Summary: If you are a science fiction fan, you will probably not be able to resist seeing this movie. Be warned, you will think you are seeing the sci-fi great that you have been waiting for but mid way the film gets lost. You may very well groan out loud at the ending. This had the makings of a great movie but unfortunately it couldn't come up with the goods.
Under-rated
battlecrusadersgames22 May 2018
Ok, so Nic Cage may not be the actor of the century but he does do poe faced well, lol.
However this movie is highly under-rated. Chandler Canterbury is fantastic and the special Fx are some of the best ive ever seen. The storyline is also thought provoking and new. My only gripe is the ending, which wouldnt have been my choice.
Worth Seeing Before the End!
treadwaywrites19 March 2009
From the trailers of Knowing you'd be convinced that you're going to watch a cheesy, try to save the world picture with a wound tight Nicolas Cage at the center gritting his teeth and ducking his way to the perfect ending. Well, you'd be partially correct. Cage is definitely giving his wound tight hero routine that he's worked so hard to develop over the last half dozen films. As for the cheese factor, that's where you'll be surprised. Director Alex Proyas manages to deliver a rather decent sci-fi flick that has plenty of suspense and intelligence.
The plot turns around John Koestler (Nicolas Cage), an MIT astrophysics nerd turned Indiana Jones when a time capsule is discovered at his young son Caleb's (Chandler Canterbury) school. Inside are drawings from students in 1959 predicting what things would be like in 2009 some 50 years later. The drawing that Caleb comes home with isn't a drawing at all but a series of seemingly random numbers. Koestler becomes obsessed with the numbers and their meaning or what they seem to mean. The whole thing shakes him to his scientific core and a quest has begun.
The film is very lucky to have director Alex Proyas from films such as Dark City which is his true geek film and critical acclaim as well as I, Robot and Garage Days. The visual and special effects are outstanding. It was surprising how much suspense was in the script (Ryan Douglas Pearson and Juliet Snowden) which gave the film a real thriller atmosphere which continues to build in tone as the mystery is unraveled.
I admit I went into this film expecting a rehash of National Treasure on a more global scale. The sci-fi aspect of the premise is very well thought out and told. The acting by co-stars (Chandler Canterbury, Rose Byrne and Lara Robinson) are solid performances and stand in complementary contrast to that of the tightly wound Nicolas Cage. The geek factor of Knowing is rather high with lots of number configurations and what-if scenarios which is great for the sci-fi fans. At times your brain may have to turn on in order to follow the film, but that is what made Knowing such a pleasant surprise to me.*
The plot turns around John Koestler (Nicolas Cage), an MIT astrophysics nerd turned Indiana Jones when a time capsule is discovered at his young son Caleb's (Chandler Canterbury) school. Inside are drawings from students in 1959 predicting what things would be like in 2009 some 50 years later. The drawing that Caleb comes home with isn't a drawing at all but a series of seemingly random numbers. Koestler becomes obsessed with the numbers and their meaning or what they seem to mean. The whole thing shakes him to his scientific core and a quest has begun.
The film is very lucky to have director Alex Proyas from films such as Dark City which is his true geek film and critical acclaim as well as I, Robot and Garage Days. The visual and special effects are outstanding. It was surprising how much suspense was in the script (Ryan Douglas Pearson and Juliet Snowden) which gave the film a real thriller atmosphere which continues to build in tone as the mystery is unraveled.
I admit I went into this film expecting a rehash of National Treasure on a more global scale. The sci-fi aspect of the premise is very well thought out and told. The acting by co-stars (Chandler Canterbury, Rose Byrne and Lara Robinson) are solid performances and stand in complementary contrast to that of the tightly wound Nicolas Cage. The geek factor of Knowing is rather high with lots of number configurations and what-if scenarios which is great for the sci-fi fans. At times your brain may have to turn on in order to follow the film, but that is what made Knowing such a pleasant surprise to me.*
Why all the hate?
vserrol29 November 2018
I know it's a bit late for a review but I feel compelled to reply to some of the criticism leveled at this movie. The reviews tend to be based on a few mistaken assumptions.
1) The movie is pro scientology propaganda
If there is any truth to this then the propaganda is very obscure, as a quick reference to scientology symbols does not include the 7 pointed star as per one detractor. To state that the movie uses a numerical based prophesy and that this is indicative of scientology is conspiratorial and nonsensical. Both the bible and koran are full of them. Maybe I am too ingenuous but at no time did I feel I was being led along a path of conscription to scientology.
2) plot holes due to slim chances of a text fortuitously falling into the hands of a person intelligent enough to decipher the meaning and be the father of one of the chosen survivors and have the descendants of the original prophecy play a part in the fruition of the plan.
fair enough, but nobody seems to question as to why the prophesy itself is possible. Surely if the universe was deterministic, as suggested by the very presence of a prophecy, then a sufficiently advanced civilization able to foresee the prophecy would also be able to foresee the path they have subscribed to the resolution they have decided on.
3) The movie doesn't make sense or jumps around too much.
Fortunately there are many straight forward shows and cartoons to watch instead .
1) The movie is pro scientology propaganda
If there is any truth to this then the propaganda is very obscure, as a quick reference to scientology symbols does not include the 7 pointed star as per one detractor. To state that the movie uses a numerical based prophesy and that this is indicative of scientology is conspiratorial and nonsensical. Both the bible and koran are full of them. Maybe I am too ingenuous but at no time did I feel I was being led along a path of conscription to scientology.
2) plot holes due to slim chances of a text fortuitously falling into the hands of a person intelligent enough to decipher the meaning and be the father of one of the chosen survivors and have the descendants of the original prophecy play a part in the fruition of the plan.
fair enough, but nobody seems to question as to why the prophesy itself is possible. Surely if the universe was deterministic, as suggested by the very presence of a prophecy, then a sufficiently advanced civilization able to foresee the prophecy would also be able to foresee the path they have subscribed to the resolution they have decided on.
3) The movie doesn't make sense or jumps around too much.
Fortunately there are many straight forward shows and cartoons to watch instead .
What if everything's not just meaningless chance?
Wuchakk26 April 2019
A disillusioned professor in the Boston area (Nicolas Cage) acquires a document that has successfully predicted tragedies for the last fifty years, but new ones as well (!). Rose Byrne plays the daughter of the seer.
"Knowing" (2009) is a quality drama/mystery with elements of disaster/sci-fi and even a little horror. It's along the lines of wonder-inducing flicks like "The Mothman Prophecies" (2002), "Contact" (1997), "The Forgotten" (2004), "The X-Files: Fight the Future" (1998), "Signs" (2002), "The Day the Earth Stood Still" (2008) and "War of the Worlds" (2005). If you favor the style and themes of those movies you'll probably like this one.
The film runs 2 hours, 1 minute and was shot in Victoria, Australia, with establishing shots of the Boston/Cambridge area.
GRADE: B
"Knowing" (2009) is a quality drama/mystery with elements of disaster/sci-fi and even a little horror. It's along the lines of wonder-inducing flicks like "The Mothman Prophecies" (2002), "Contact" (1997), "The Forgotten" (2004), "The X-Files: Fight the Future" (1998), "Signs" (2002), "The Day the Earth Stood Still" (2008) and "War of the Worlds" (2005). If you favor the style and themes of those movies you'll probably like this one.
The film runs 2 hours, 1 minute and was shot in Victoria, Australia, with establishing shots of the Boston/Cambridge area.
GRADE: B
Meaty, 7/10
worldsworstwryter18 April 2022
I can't decide between a 7 or an 8 for this. As soon as it ended I was kinda angry at it, but the more I think about it, the more I've made peace with the movie.
As usual, Nicolas Cage is great, and everyone else is good. The story is interesting, with a great premise that made me really interested to see what would happen.
The film gets all its 'non stop deadly action' scenes over with pretty quickly, so I was unsure how they were going to spend the rest of the running time. I needn't have worried though, because there are a couple of bonkers twists that kept my attention.
Speaking of twists, I really was not impressed with part of the ending at first. I was confused about it, but after a bit of thinking I am more OK with it. However I will say, that the use of Beethoven's 7th symphony at the end is absolutely brilliant.
Ultimately, I can't take too many points off for the ending, because this film has convinced me of something that I've suspected for a while.
Some films are impossible to end in a satisfactory way.
I think disaster movies in particular are susceptible to this, but there are some stories that are built up in such a way that no ending would properly conclude it. The ending to this film left me a bit unsatisfied, but if it had ended any other way, it would've been just as disappointing. There's no twist that could live up to the direction the story was going in.
Overall, this was a pretty enjoyable movie with an interesting story, and a shocking ending that I think people will be conflicted on, although I'm pretty sure that was inevitable.
As usual, Nicolas Cage is great, and everyone else is good. The story is interesting, with a great premise that made me really interested to see what would happen.
The film gets all its 'non stop deadly action' scenes over with pretty quickly, so I was unsure how they were going to spend the rest of the running time. I needn't have worried though, because there are a couple of bonkers twists that kept my attention.
Speaking of twists, I really was not impressed with part of the ending at first. I was confused about it, but after a bit of thinking I am more OK with it. However I will say, that the use of Beethoven's 7th symphony at the end is absolutely brilliant.
Ultimately, I can't take too many points off for the ending, because this film has convinced me of something that I've suspected for a while.
Some films are impossible to end in a satisfactory way.
I think disaster movies in particular are susceptible to this, but there are some stories that are built up in such a way that no ending would properly conclude it. The ending to this film left me a bit unsatisfied, but if it had ended any other way, it would've been just as disappointing. There's no twist that could live up to the direction the story was going in.
Overall, this was a pretty enjoyable movie with an interesting story, and a shocking ending that I think people will be conflicted on, although I'm pretty sure that was inevitable.
Interesting Idea
jace_the_film_guy9 July 2021
Kind of similar to 'The Box' (if that's any help)
bowmanblue26 January 2021
I know that nowadays the name 'Nicolas Cage' is met with either a smirk or a sigh, depending on how you view him. His recent movies have hardly set the Box Office on fire (most being released straight to DVD or streaming service) and it's hard to remember a time when he was A-list material and capable of selling a movie on his name alone. However, there was a brief period in between his blockbusters and his, er, 'lesser' films where he made some which were actually pretty good - and yet still seems to have been forgotten. 'Knowing' is definitely one of them.
Cage is also well known for his own brand of 'over-acting' which can be anything from comical to cringe-worthy. Here, director Alex Proyas seems to be able to reel him in enough to capitalise on his talent, while at the same time keep him grounded. Cage plays a school teacher who, along with his young son, stumbles on a code back from the fifties which accurately depicts all the major disasters of the last few decades. If this wasn't creepy enough, some are set to occur in the next few days and there are some odd-looking men lurking around his family.
I won't go into the plot too much for fear of spoilers because, I really do think that if you're into science-fiction then you'll really enjoy this one. It's got some nice ideas and isn't afraid to go in directions that you might not see coming.
Cage is still great as a leading man and I've been a fan of director Alex Proyas' work ever since he did 'The Crow.' This may not have the visual flare of some of his early work, but he deserves props for getting a really good performance out of his leading man.
If the film has a weakness I'd say its special effects are a little uneven. I was actually really impressed with some of them and they left me pretty creeped out. However, it looks like the 'effects budget' was spent on the big set pieces and when it came to some of the 'lesser' effects (mainly involving fire) they look very 'computery' - if you know what I mean.
There's another 'forgotten' sci-fi film called 'The Box,' starring Cameron Diaz and directed by 'Donnie Darko's' Richard Kelly which feels like it could be set in 'the same universe' as 'Knowing.' So, if you have seen 'The Box' (and again - don't believe the negative reviews - it's actually pretty good for some dark sci-fi drama) and you liked it, definitely give 'Knowing' a try. It may not be a 'feel-good' movie, but if you're in the mood for some dark sci-fi, or just a Cage fan, give it a go.
Cage is also well known for his own brand of 'over-acting' which can be anything from comical to cringe-worthy. Here, director Alex Proyas seems to be able to reel him in enough to capitalise on his talent, while at the same time keep him grounded. Cage plays a school teacher who, along with his young son, stumbles on a code back from the fifties which accurately depicts all the major disasters of the last few decades. If this wasn't creepy enough, some are set to occur in the next few days and there are some odd-looking men lurking around his family.
I won't go into the plot too much for fear of spoilers because, I really do think that if you're into science-fiction then you'll really enjoy this one. It's got some nice ideas and isn't afraid to go in directions that you might not see coming.
Cage is still great as a leading man and I've been a fan of director Alex Proyas' work ever since he did 'The Crow.' This may not have the visual flare of some of his early work, but he deserves props for getting a really good performance out of his leading man.
If the film has a weakness I'd say its special effects are a little uneven. I was actually really impressed with some of them and they left me pretty creeped out. However, it looks like the 'effects budget' was spent on the big set pieces and when it came to some of the 'lesser' effects (mainly involving fire) they look very 'computery' - if you know what I mean.
There's another 'forgotten' sci-fi film called 'The Box,' starring Cameron Diaz and directed by 'Donnie Darko's' Richard Kelly which feels like it could be set in 'the same universe' as 'Knowing.' So, if you have seen 'The Box' (and again - don't believe the negative reviews - it's actually pretty good for some dark sci-fi drama) and you liked it, definitely give 'Knowing' a try. It may not be a 'feel-good' movie, but if you're in the mood for some dark sci-fi, or just a Cage fan, give it a go.
And in the end...
MaxBorg8911 July 2009
What has happened to Alex Proyas? Back in the '90s, he directed dark, edgy pieces of sci-fi/horror, like The Crow and Dark City, that didn't necessarily pander to studio or audience expectations. Nowadays, he's gone in exactly the opposite direction, first with the fun but uneven Will Smith vehicle I, Robot (which doesn't have much in common with Asimov, despite the title) and now with the Nicolas Cage-starring Knowing. Entirely bad it ain't, but boy, does it struggle from time to time.
Cage plays a physics professor at MIT, named John Koestler, who teaches students about the notion of determinism, i.e. the theory that everything is part of a precise, already established plan. The irony is that he doesn't believe any of that stuff since his wife died in a tragic accident, leaving him alone with his young son Caleb (Chandler Canterbury). One day, something special occurs at Caleb's school: a time capsule, which was buried fifty years earlier, is unearthed so that the new generation can see what kids thought the future would look like back then. Instead of a drawing, Caleb ends up with a page containing a bizarre sequence of numbers. John takes a look at the sequence, and quickly (?) realizes that the numbers represent the dates and body count of every major disaster of the last five decades, including 9/11, Katrina and - big surprise - the death of the missus. Three of the predictions, however, have yet to come true, so John must find a way to prevent them from happening. Additionally, he has to deal with a group of weird-looking people who are interested in Caleb.
If it all sounds a bit familiar, that's because it is: while the story develops on its own terms, the premise alone, coupled with the creepy atmosphere, could come from an episode of The X-Files. In case the similarities weren't clear enough, the writers have even replicated the Mulder-Scully dynamic in the shape of John and his reluctant partner Diana (Rose Byrne) and added the inevitable religious subtext, which is hinted at from the very beginning (John's dad is a preacher). Also, the Strangers look kind of... In short, it's the sense of déjà vu that brings down most of Knowing: the third act is very easy to guess, the father/son relationship is sketchy, yada yada yada.
And yet Proyas manages to get some things admirably right: the tension is actually pretty consistent, with a few professionally delivered jump-scares along the way, and the visual effects are state-of-the-art, most notably in the impressive central set-piece which - a true stroke of genius, this one - is depicted in a single, continuous shot. Additionally, Cage's performance is one of his most convincing in quite some time. Okay, so it's not that difficult given his recent body of work includes the likes of The Wicker Man, Ghost Rider and Next, but his portrayal of a man who questions his beliefs (there we go again) adds some emotional weight to the picture. And that's without mentioning the refreshingly merciless conclusion...
Knowing is nothing new, meaning that the few unexpected elements it contains are rapidly sidelined by textbook scripting. Still, even on an off-day Proyas manages to pull off a collection of oddly compelling images (Cage's hair not included). Not quite enough, but we already sort of knew that, right?
Cage plays a physics professor at MIT, named John Koestler, who teaches students about the notion of determinism, i.e. the theory that everything is part of a precise, already established plan. The irony is that he doesn't believe any of that stuff since his wife died in a tragic accident, leaving him alone with his young son Caleb (Chandler Canterbury). One day, something special occurs at Caleb's school: a time capsule, which was buried fifty years earlier, is unearthed so that the new generation can see what kids thought the future would look like back then. Instead of a drawing, Caleb ends up with a page containing a bizarre sequence of numbers. John takes a look at the sequence, and quickly (?) realizes that the numbers represent the dates and body count of every major disaster of the last five decades, including 9/11, Katrina and - big surprise - the death of the missus. Three of the predictions, however, have yet to come true, so John must find a way to prevent them from happening. Additionally, he has to deal with a group of weird-looking people who are interested in Caleb.
If it all sounds a bit familiar, that's because it is: while the story develops on its own terms, the premise alone, coupled with the creepy atmosphere, could come from an episode of The X-Files. In case the similarities weren't clear enough, the writers have even replicated the Mulder-Scully dynamic in the shape of John and his reluctant partner Diana (Rose Byrne) and added the inevitable religious subtext, which is hinted at from the very beginning (John's dad is a preacher). Also, the Strangers look kind of... In short, it's the sense of déjà vu that brings down most of Knowing: the third act is very easy to guess, the father/son relationship is sketchy, yada yada yada.
And yet Proyas manages to get some things admirably right: the tension is actually pretty consistent, with a few professionally delivered jump-scares along the way, and the visual effects are state-of-the-art, most notably in the impressive central set-piece which - a true stroke of genius, this one - is depicted in a single, continuous shot. Additionally, Cage's performance is one of his most convincing in quite some time. Okay, so it's not that difficult given his recent body of work includes the likes of The Wicker Man, Ghost Rider and Next, but his portrayal of a man who questions his beliefs (there we go again) adds some emotional weight to the picture. And that's without mentioning the refreshingly merciless conclusion...
Knowing is nothing new, meaning that the few unexpected elements it contains are rapidly sidelined by textbook scripting. Still, even on an off-day Proyas manages to pull off a collection of oddly compelling images (Cage's hair not included). Not quite enough, but we already sort of knew that, right?
Clever and well done.
dskauai_bunch3 January 2012
This movie was a nice surprise. I usually don't like Nicholas Cage movies. Any of them. But he was perfectly cast for this science fiction piece and delivered a solid, believable performance.
The story itself was brand new, not a rehash of any tale that I can recall.
The directing allowed you to see the film without knowing until the very end what was happening - which was great. I usually enjoy figuring out the end before it gets there, because it usually seems that if I CAN'T figure it out... the movie is poor. That has been my experience. But Knowing delivered a solid mystery up to the end, with the type of finale where one thinks, "Oh, I should have seen it coming, those 100 things that happened all make sense!" Really, all the little details came together in a flash of a solid closing.
I also appreciated that there were no loose ends. Everything was tied together in a neat bow with nothing hanging out.
The only negative that I have will sound humorous to you if you don't see the movie, but I won't spoil it for you except to say that the metaphor of a pair of bunnies wasn't necessary.
Catch this movie when you can, it's definitely worth it.
The story itself was brand new, not a rehash of any tale that I can recall.
The directing allowed you to see the film without knowing until the very end what was happening - which was great. I usually enjoy figuring out the end before it gets there, because it usually seems that if I CAN'T figure it out... the movie is poor. That has been my experience. But Knowing delivered a solid mystery up to the end, with the type of finale where one thinks, "Oh, I should have seen it coming, those 100 things that happened all make sense!" Really, all the little details came together in a flash of a solid closing.
I also appreciated that there were no loose ends. Everything was tied together in a neat bow with nothing hanging out.
The only negative that I have will sound humorous to you if you don't see the movie, but I won't spoil it for you except to say that the metaphor of a pair of bunnies wasn't necessary.
Catch this movie when you can, it's definitely worth it.
Powerful and mysterious Sci-fi movie with attractive characters , intrigue enough and surprising conclusion
ma-cortes11 June 2021
An obstinate professor : Nicolas Cage links a bizarre list of of numbers from a time capsule -that belongs to his son : Chandler Canterbury from the Elementary Schooll - to past and future events . The amiable professor will stop at nothing to discover the mysteries , and whatever means he'll try to save his child until an overwhelming final climax . Knowing is Everything . What happens when the Numbers Run Out ?
A superbly crafted Sci-fi thriller with emotion , suspense, chills , thrills , intriguing events , twists and turns . It contains a lot of spectacular scenes , incredible disasters , total destruction , all of them made by means of effective state-of-art special effects . It is an enjoyable and decent fantasy movie with a twisted plot and supenseful . This well paced film, developing itself little by little , with sudden surprises showing up here and there until an impressive , breathtaking ending conclusion. Decent main and support cast . Nicolas Cage is acceptable as the stubborn professor who wants to finds out the fantastic mystery , he is much better than his subsequent films , most of them moving into B or Z subgenre . Cage is well accompanied by Rose Byrne , Ben Mendelsohn , Liam Hemsworth's cameo and Chandler Canterbury as a kind little boy, both of them are pretty well
It displays a colorful and brilliant cinematography by cameraman Simon Duggan , including some dark and sinister images . As well as a thrilling and rousing musical score by Marco Beltrani , this great composer is expert on dark and tenebrous atmospheres . The motion picture was compellingly directed by Alex Proyas . He's a nice filmmaker who has made good films , getting successes enough , most of them Science Fiction or Fantasy movies , such as : "Gods of Egypt" , "The Raven" , "Dark City" , "Garage Days" , "I Robot" , among others . Rating : 6.5/10 . Worthwhile watching . The flick will appeal to Nicolas Cage fans .
A superbly crafted Sci-fi thriller with emotion , suspense, chills , thrills , intriguing events , twists and turns . It contains a lot of spectacular scenes , incredible disasters , total destruction , all of them made by means of effective state-of-art special effects . It is an enjoyable and decent fantasy movie with a twisted plot and supenseful . This well paced film, developing itself little by little , with sudden surprises showing up here and there until an impressive , breathtaking ending conclusion. Decent main and support cast . Nicolas Cage is acceptable as the stubborn professor who wants to finds out the fantastic mystery , he is much better than his subsequent films , most of them moving into B or Z subgenre . Cage is well accompanied by Rose Byrne , Ben Mendelsohn , Liam Hemsworth's cameo and Chandler Canterbury as a kind little boy, both of them are pretty well
It displays a colorful and brilliant cinematography by cameraman Simon Duggan , including some dark and sinister images . As well as a thrilling and rousing musical score by Marco Beltrani , this great composer is expert on dark and tenebrous atmospheres . The motion picture was compellingly directed by Alex Proyas . He's a nice filmmaker who has made good films , getting successes enough , most of them Science Fiction or Fantasy movies , such as : "Gods of Egypt" , "The Raven" , "Dark City" , "Garage Days" , "I Robot" , among others . Rating : 6.5/10 . Worthwhile watching . The flick will appeal to Nicolas Cage fans .
Knowing
sakram19 October 2017
The weird thing about this review is that I watched it 3 years ago and I partially forgot things that went on in this movie. But it's fine, cause needless to say, it's a good movie, and I really enjoyed it back then, and it had me in the edge of my seat a few times, and the ending is epic as well, it deals with the idea that the world be at stake, and how eventually to save it.
I really liked it, and I might as well re-watch it, kudos to Nicolas Cage for his magnificent acting ! 7/10
I really liked it, and I might as well re-watch it, kudos to Nicolas Cage for his magnificent acting ! 7/10
Most underrated sci fi movie of all time?
osoliman812 April 2023
Just stumbled on this film and all I can think is... how have I not heard of this movie before and why are people hating on it so much?? Beginning to end this is a solid flick. Nic Cage isn't gonna win an Oscar but he does a fine job.. . Plus when this movie becomes a cult classic Nic Cage will make those midnight showings event better. The story is thought provoking and the writers didn't take any easy way outs. If you like apocalyptic sci movies this is a MUST watch. DONT LISTEN TO THE HATERS!!!
I think this will become a cult classic... call me crazy. I would def go watch this is a movie theatre with.
I think this will become a cult classic... call me crazy. I would def go watch this is a movie theatre with.
I really don't get why it's only got 6/10
maayandanino16 September 2020
An enjoyable film. (NO SPOILERS)
dyellow-3890218 April 2016
I like these types of films and enjoyed this one as well. Its not the best film of this type I have seen but its still worth watching.
Basically The main character who is played by Nicolas Cage has a son and one day he brings home a sheet of paper with a load of numbers on it. He got the sheet of paper from a time capsule that was buried 50 odd years previously by students who went to the same school. Cage is fascinated by this and discovers the numbers point to previous disasters that have happened throughout the world. He then realises some of the numbers point towards possible future disasters. I wont say any more as its best to watch the film.
The plot itself is relativity strong but does have a few minor flaws. There is a fair amount of mystery and action in the film as well.
I would recommend this film especially for people who like films such as 2012 or the day after tomorrow.
Basically The main character who is played by Nicolas Cage has a son and one day he brings home a sheet of paper with a load of numbers on it. He got the sheet of paper from a time capsule that was buried 50 odd years previously by students who went to the same school. Cage is fascinated by this and discovers the numbers point to previous disasters that have happened throughout the world. He then realises some of the numbers point towards possible future disasters. I wont say any more as its best to watch the film.
The plot itself is relativity strong but does have a few minor flaws. There is a fair amount of mystery and action in the film as well.
I would recommend this film especially for people who like films such as 2012 or the day after tomorrow.
Interesting Ideas
willamanah25 January 2020
There was a lot that was right with this flick. There was some good and questionable acting moments. There were some liberties taken with the plot that had me scratching me head. I feel like this movie had cutting edge cgi for 2009. The last ten minutes dropped this from what could have possibly been a 7 if I was feeling generous. No one will ever read this. I am a lonely person. Ahahahahaha, a hahahaha, aaaahahahaha!!!
Good dark film - fan of pyros
GodisGreat200022 February 2012
I thought this was arguably one of the best movies of our time. With that said, I've gotta admit I'm a scifi movie lover and these movies are my kinda thing.
This movie literally had everything I typically LOVE in a movie, a great beginning, a thriller climax, and a killer ending. There were no plot holes to this film, which initially made me love this movie in the first place. One thing I love about this movie has to be after I watch it a couple of times- I actually notice little hidden things in the climax that ultimately lead up to the ending, things you don't typically notice when you first watch this movie.
Those who love the indie film-type endings, or those who love horror or slasher films, or actually anyone who likes cliff-hanger endings- this might not be for you. But if you love apocalypse type movies, or are a thriller fanatic then you'll hopefully like this movie. This movie also supports the Christian/Catholic faith- so if you are against it in any way- this movie may not suit you. With that said, it's NOT a Jesus loving movie. The ending has a lot to do with the Christian faith and if that's not for you- don't watch it.
All in all, this is a pretty spectacular movie. The music was on cue with everything in the movie and the scenes were incredible. Each scene had you gripping onto your seat in anticipation. Although this is very under-appreciated, I hope you will give this movie a try.
This movie literally had everything I typically LOVE in a movie, a great beginning, a thriller climax, and a killer ending. There were no plot holes to this film, which initially made me love this movie in the first place. One thing I love about this movie has to be after I watch it a couple of times- I actually notice little hidden things in the climax that ultimately lead up to the ending, things you don't typically notice when you first watch this movie.
Those who love the indie film-type endings, or those who love horror or slasher films, or actually anyone who likes cliff-hanger endings- this might not be for you. But if you love apocalypse type movies, or are a thriller fanatic then you'll hopefully like this movie. This movie also supports the Christian/Catholic faith- so if you are against it in any way- this movie may not suit you. With that said, it's NOT a Jesus loving movie. The ending has a lot to do with the Christian faith and if that's not for you- don't watch it.
All in all, this is a pretty spectacular movie. The music was on cue with everything in the movie and the scenes were incredible. Each scene had you gripping onto your seat in anticipation. Although this is very under-appreciated, I hope you will give this movie a try.
Sc-fi Classic: A blockbuster for thinking people
roscoe66619 November 2018
Nicholas Cage's son receives a series of numbers from a 1950s time capsule that a psychic girl wrote 50 years earlier, which predict major disasters in the future.
Big budget sci-fi, which must be commended for its consistent downbeat tone and lack of histrionics. Normally, a Hollywood blockbuster would have the hero knowing all the answers and riding in to save the day. Can Nic Cage do it, and how? The lack of predictability is its major strength. His understated performances were made for this film.
If you're in the right mood, you must see this. I've seen this film 8 or 9 times, and it's only been out 9 years, so it must be doing something right. Even when I know every line of the film it still drags you in each time it pops up on tv.
Yes, there are some cheesy moments, with some obvious CGI, and the middle third loses track somewhat, but the relentlessly downbeat tone shows what can be done with the right budget. In earlier viewings I thought it was a bit of a mish mash of genres, although still great, but subsequent viewings reveal the relevance of each plot development.
Overall, highly recommended. What's not to like about a film that is a cross between Final Destination, The Medusa Touch and Arrival?
Big budget sci-fi, which must be commended for its consistent downbeat tone and lack of histrionics. Normally, a Hollywood blockbuster would have the hero knowing all the answers and riding in to save the day. Can Nic Cage do it, and how? The lack of predictability is its major strength. His understated performances were made for this film.
If you're in the right mood, you must see this. I've seen this film 8 or 9 times, and it's only been out 9 years, so it must be doing something right. Even when I know every line of the film it still drags you in each time it pops up on tv.
Yes, there are some cheesy moments, with some obvious CGI, and the middle third loses track somewhat, but the relentlessly downbeat tone shows what can be done with the right budget. In earlier viewings I thought it was a bit of a mish mash of genres, although still great, but subsequent viewings reveal the relevance of each plot development.
Overall, highly recommended. What's not to like about a film that is a cross between Final Destination, The Medusa Touch and Arrival?
Great film, destroyed by religious preaching!
Johannsson_921 June 2009
As a huge Sci-Fi fan, i was really excited about this film. After watching it was pretty satisfied, but i just couldn't overlook the overwhelming religious message of the film.
Half way into the film i thought to myself :"This will be a sure 9/10". But when it was all over, i was really disappointed that the writers, decided to turn, what could have been a perfectly good sci-fi film, into a religious preaching film.
On the other hand, it's definitely worth watching. It has almost everything a great Sci-fi/Thriller needs. Great Visual FX, great plot and great directing. And the music couldn't have been better for this film.
So to sum it up, this movie could have been a solid 9/10, But sadly it was destroyed by religious preaching.
7/10.....
Half way into the film i thought to myself :"This will be a sure 9/10". But when it was all over, i was really disappointed that the writers, decided to turn, what could have been a perfectly good sci-fi film, into a religious preaching film.
On the other hand, it's definitely worth watching. It has almost everything a great Sci-fi/Thriller needs. Great Visual FX, great plot and great directing. And the music couldn't have been better for this film.
So to sum it up, this movie could have been a solid 9/10, But sadly it was destroyed by religious preaching.
7/10.....
This is one excellent. Imaginative movie. Which could happen
michaelthompsonmcgill27 November 2011
I have read a lot of totally negative views about this film, and so I can only say that some people simply have no imagination.
"Knowing" works at every level. It is a brilliantly executed film. And the final is breathtaking.
I watched this film with my wife and we are not easily pleased movie watchers.
I find myself being critical of the negative reviews, because I am astounded at their lack of imagination.
Without imagination, we would never have had The Time Machine thanks to Herbert George Wells. This is just one example.
Another is Steven Spielberg's "Close Encounters". Imagination is the key word here, and so many reviewers did not have any whatsoever.
Knowing kept my wife and I on the edge of our seats, it was clever, it was imaginative, it was first class.
"Knowing" works at every level. It is a brilliantly executed film. And the final is breathtaking.
I watched this film with my wife and we are not easily pleased movie watchers.
I find myself being critical of the negative reviews, because I am astounded at their lack of imagination.
Without imagination, we would never have had The Time Machine thanks to Herbert George Wells. This is just one example.
Another is Steven Spielberg's "Close Encounters". Imagination is the key word here, and so many reviewers did not have any whatsoever.
Knowing kept my wife and I on the edge of our seats, it was clever, it was imaginative, it was first class.
Pythagorus As Nostradamus.
hitchcockthelegend20 September 2015
Knowing is directed by Alex Proyas and collectively written by Ryne Douglas Pearson, Juliet Snowden and Stiles White. It stars Nicolas Cage, Rose Byrne, Chandler Canterbury, Lara Robinson, Ben Mendelsohn and Nadia Townsend. Music is by Marco Beltrami and cinematography by Simon Duggan.
1959, and young schoolgirl Lucinda Embry (Robinson) keeps hearing voices. When asked to submit a drawing for the school time capsule– that's to be opened in 50 years time,– she writes a series of random numbers that don't appear to make sense. Forward to 50 years and the grand opening of the capsule, where Professor Jonathan Koestler (Cage) and his young son come by way of Lucinda's numbers. Just what do they mean? If anything?...
Ah yes, the good old disaster movie, a genre of film that continues unabated through the decades, this in spite of critical indifference. But the paying public still keep turning up in droves, even in this new technological age. Where once was models being destroyed, and paintings forming elegant backdrops, now is whizz bangery that costs a fortune. Still great fun, though, which is why something like Knowing exists and has many fans.
It's a splendid piece of sci-fi hokum pulsing with supernatural overtones, a gentle creeper unravelling the mystery in layers until the final countdown begins. The science is obviously dubious (it's a movie folks) and the air of pessimism that hovers consistently over proceedings (not only is the world in trouble, but all the protags have miserable issues as well), may be too much for some. However, Cage is as committed as ever, Proyas yet again proves himself a beautiful visualist, while the scenes of carnage are truly harrowing and unforgettable.
A popcorner with moments of wonder and awe, and yes of course, some cheese as well. Ignore the Cage haters, if you like sci-fi infused disaster movies and haven't had fun with this one yet, then do so, it's a blast. And did I say it's gorgeous to look at as well? It is! 7/10
1959, and young schoolgirl Lucinda Embry (Robinson) keeps hearing voices. When asked to submit a drawing for the school time capsule– that's to be opened in 50 years time,– she writes a series of random numbers that don't appear to make sense. Forward to 50 years and the grand opening of the capsule, where Professor Jonathan Koestler (Cage) and his young son come by way of Lucinda's numbers. Just what do they mean? If anything?...
Ah yes, the good old disaster movie, a genre of film that continues unabated through the decades, this in spite of critical indifference. But the paying public still keep turning up in droves, even in this new technological age. Where once was models being destroyed, and paintings forming elegant backdrops, now is whizz bangery that costs a fortune. Still great fun, though, which is why something like Knowing exists and has many fans.
It's a splendid piece of sci-fi hokum pulsing with supernatural overtones, a gentle creeper unravelling the mystery in layers until the final countdown begins. The science is obviously dubious (it's a movie folks) and the air of pessimism that hovers consistently over proceedings (not only is the world in trouble, but all the protags have miserable issues as well), may be too much for some. However, Cage is as committed as ever, Proyas yet again proves himself a beautiful visualist, while the scenes of carnage are truly harrowing and unforgettable.
A popcorner with moments of wonder and awe, and yes of course, some cheese as well. Ignore the Cage haters, if you like sci-fi infused disaster movies and haven't had fun with this one yet, then do so, it's a blast. And did I say it's gorgeous to look at as well? It is! 7/10
"Intelligent Design" propaganda
russkysam30 March 2009
I was pretty intrigued by the flow of the movie and the twists and mysteries it presented. I did cringe a bit at the classroom scene where the protagonist questions if the creation of life was a result of random chaotic events. I cringed but dismissed it as an appeasement to the majority of religious people in this country. Granted, after the above-mentioned scene the movie turns back on a mystery/thriller track... As some other reviewers mentioned, and I agree, a movie is worth 6-7 stars out of 10... until you see the "grand finale" that is.
It is then that the movie truly reveals its face - nothing more than creationists' piece of propaganda: "Life is too complicated to be created by accident/evolution and too fragile to exist/survive without some sort of divine/alien interference." Cheap and reprehensible way to end a movie. I'm still shaking with anger feeling cheated by the climax of the movie showing the transparent "intelligent design" message behind it...
It is then that the movie truly reveals its face - nothing more than creationists' piece of propaganda: "Life is too complicated to be created by accident/evolution and too fragile to exist/survive without some sort of divine/alien interference." Cheap and reprehensible way to end a movie. I'm still shaking with anger feeling cheated by the climax of the movie showing the transparent "intelligent design" message behind it...
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
